Instruments for Development Controls in Gerbangkertosusila


  • Adjie Pamungkas Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember Surabaya (ITS), Kampus ITS Sukolilo Surabaya
  • Erma Fitria Rini Universitas Sebelas Maret (UNS), Surakarta Indonesia
  • Prio Nur Cahyo Dinas Pekerjaan Umum ?? Ciptakarya dan Tata Ruang, Propinsi Jawa Timur



Gerbangkertosusila (GKS) is one of the national strategic areas (KSN) consisting of 7 municipal and 1 provincial governments. The main objective of KSN is to accelerate and coordinate the development process on the macro level including arterial and toll road systems, development around the Suramadu Bridge Area, and regional seaport development. However, the development acceleration and coordination among the municipalities is still inadequate. Therefore, a partnership among parties is needed to promote and control development within GKS. Consequently, agreed instruments of development control are some of the key steps for successful partnerships.

To agree on development control instruments, stakeholders are required to assess 60 proposed instruments within the four groups of development control (zoning, planning permits, sanction and development incentives and disincentives). Based on the questionnaire outputs, stakeholders consider the roles of municipal authority far greater than the provincial level and the body of GKS. The body of GKS is suggested to serve only in coordination the three main development activities (planning, implementation and controlling). The output of the questionnaire was then re-assessed and agreed by stakeholders in a focus group discussion (FGD). In the FGD, stakeholders agreed that the municipal and provincial governments have similar roles in implementation and monev (monitoring and evaluating) of developments. The body of GKS is directed to coordinate, monitor and evaluate key development projects in GKS. The FGD also resulted in agreed instruments, which are; 2 instruments in zoning, 4 instruments in permits, 10 instruments in sanction, 17 instruments in development incentives and 5 instruments in development disincentives. The role of coordination and monev of the GKS body is also highlighted via development schemes in every agreed instrument.

Keywords. Instruments, development control, GKS, coordination.

Gerbangkertosusila (GKS) adalah salah satu kawasan strategis nasional (KSN) yang terdiri dari 7 kota/ kabupaten dan 1 propinsi. Tujuan utama KSN adalah untuk mempercepat dan mengkoordinasikan proses pembangunan pada tingkat makro termasuk sistem jalan arteri dan tol, pembangunan di sekitar Kawasan Jembatan Suramadu, dan pembangunan pelabuhan wilayah. Namun, percepatan dan koordinasi pembangunan diantara pemerintah daerah masih belum memadai. Oleh sebab itu, kerja sama diperlukan untuk mempromosikan dan mengendalikan pembangunan di GKS. Sebagai konsekuensinya, instrumen pengendalian pembangunan yang disetujui merupakan langkah kunci untuk keberhasilan kerja sama tersebut.

Berdasarkan hasil analisis kuesioner, pemangku kepentingan menganggap bahwa peran pemerintah kota/ kabupaten jauh lebih penting daripada provinsi dan lembaga wilayah. Dalam FGD, para pemangku kepentingan sepakat bahwa lembaga wilayah diarahkan untuk mengkoordinasikan, memonitor dan mengevaluasi proyek-proyek pembangunan kunci GKS. FGD juga menyetujui perlunya sejumlah instrumen berupa zoning, perijinan, sanksi, insentif dan disinsentif.

Kata Kunci: instrumen, pengendalian pembangunan, GKS, koordinasi.

Author Biography

Adjie Pamungkas, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember Surabaya (ITS), Kampus ITS Sukolilo Surabaya

Urban and Regional Planning Department


Bulmer, M. (2004) Questionnaires, 1st edition, Sage Benchmarks in Social Science Research Methods, edited by: Bulmer, M., Sage Publications, London, 354.

Dunn, W. (2000) Pengantar Analisis Kebijakan Publik. 2nd edition. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.

Fu, Q., J. Lu, and Y. Lu (2011) Incentivizing R&D: Prize or Subsidies?. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 30(1), 67-79.

Girling, C. and K. Helpland (2007) Retrofitting Suburbia: Open Space in Bellevue, Washington, USA. Eugene: Department of Landscape Architecture, Oregon University.

Guillerme, S., B.M. Kumar, A. Menon, C. Hinnewinkel, E. Maire, and A.V. Santhoshkumar (2011) Impacts of Public Policies and Farmer Preference on Agroforestry Practices in Kerala, India. Environmental Management, 48, 351- 364.

Jakobsson, C., S. Fujii, and T. Garling (2004) Effects of Economic Disincentives on Private Car Use. Transportation, Kluwer Academic Publisher, 29, 349-270.

Harte, M., P. Endreny, G. Sylvia, and H.M. Mann (2007) Developing Underutilized Fisheries: Oregon's Developmental Fisheries Program. Marine Policy, 32(4), 643-652.

Kaps, H. (2004) Quality Shipping - Incentives, Disincentives. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 3(1), 85-97.

Kaya, D., F.. Knlnb, A. Babana, and S. Dikea (2008) Administrative, Institutional and Legislative Issues on Agricultural Waste Exploitation in Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 12, 417-436.

Kingma, M. (2003) Economic Incentive in Community Nursing: Attraction, Rejection or Indifference? Human Resources for Health, BioMed Central I:2.

Kousis, M. (1989) Tourism And The Family in A Rural Cretan Family. Annuals of Tourism Research, Pergamon, 16, pp. 318-332.

Lee, Y. (2008) Geographic Redistribution of US Manufacturing and The Role of State Development Policy. Journal of Urban Economics, 64(2), 436-450.

Leitner, H. (1990) Cities In Pursuit of Economic Growth - The Local State As Entrepreneur. Political Geography Quarterly, Butterworth & Co. 9, 2, 146-170.

Linkous, E.R. (2016) Transfer of Development Rights in Theory and Practices: The restructuring of TDR to Incentivize Development. Land Use Policy, 51, 162-171.

Milne, C.P. and Bruss, J. (2008) The Economic of Pediatric Formulation Development for Off-Patent Drugs. Clinical Therapeutics, Excerpta Medica.

Huallachain, B.O. and M.A. Satterthwaite (1992) Sectoral Growth Patterns at the Metropolitan Level: An Evaluation of Economic Development Incentives. Journal of Urban Economic, 3(1), 25-58.

Pappis, C. (1990) Production Cost In The Periphery: The Case Of Greece. University of Patras. Yunani.

Paula, C.S., E. Lauridsen-Ribeiro, L. Wissow, I.A.S. Bordin, and S. Evans-Lacko (2012) How To Improve The Mental Health Care Of Children And Adolescents In Brazil: Actions Needed In The Public Sector. Rev Bras Psiquiatr, 34, 334-341.

Radermacher, R. and J. Brinkmann (2011) Insurance for the Poor? The Case of Italy. International Advances in Economic Research, IAES 12, 213-227.

Robinson, N. (1999) The Use of Focus Group Methodology - with Selected Examples from Sexual Health Research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 29(4), 905-913.

Sugii, T. (2008) Plastic Bag Reduction: Policies to Reduce Environmental Impact. Thesis. Department of Urban and Environmental Policy and Planning. USA: Tufts University.

Tongco, M.D.C. (2007) Purposive Sampling as A Tool for Informant Selection. Ethnobotany Research & Applications, 5,147-158.

Tsai, J. and R. Rosenheck (2013) Examination of Veterans Affairs Disability Compensation as a Disincentive for Employment in a Population-Based Sample of Veterans Under Age 65. Springer.

Thomas, M. (2001) A GIS-Based Decision Support System for Brownfield Redevelopment. Landscape and Urban Planning, 58(1), 7-23.

USA Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Pay-As-You-Throw. ee/epa/eerm.nsf/oet/6972e76194b4799c8525644d0053be6d (access on 21 April, 2015).

Wanhill, S. (1986) Which Investment Incentives for Tourism? Tourism Management, Butterworth & Co (Publisher).

Warner, R. and P. Polak (1995) The Economic Advancement of the Mentally Ill in the Community: Economic Choices and Disincentives. Community Mental Health Journal, Human Science Press, 31(5), 477-492.

World Bank (2012) Getting to Green - A Sourcebook of Pollution Management Policy Tools for Growth and Competitiveness. /Resources/Getting_to_Green_web.pdf (access on 2 January, 2015).

Zuluaga, M. and Dyner I. (2006) Incentives For Renewable Energy In Reformed Latin-American Electricity Markets: The Colombian Case. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(2), 153-162.






Research Articles